I agree Sinfield should start over Frawley, but i doubt he will.

Smiths loyalty to under performing favourites will be his downfall

I just hope we don't leave a player on the bench all game

McDonnell will end up as a prop too slow and predictable we desperately need a break out runner in the 2nd row who can offload loads of options available if the club are serious.

Experience and better defender.

Frawley likely to start IMO, as he is a better defender and Saints have big back rowers to content with. Sinfield is though a far more rounded player, and was much better vs Catalans then Frawley, who offered little.

Unfortunately McDonnell hasn't kicked on the way I hoped he would. A good solid pro and fairly dependable, but nothing that puts him in the category of elite back rowers in the comp. I wonder if the lack of competition in the BR has lead to be a bit of complacency. Ironically it's out strongest position in terms of depth in the squad numbers.

Sinfield should be starting all day every day for this game. He isn’t a kid anymore, he’s 20 in a few months and needs game time ahead of an abject signing that puts his own team under so much pressure. Frawley’s only benefit compared to Sinfield is he may be bigger and have the edge in defence, but every Leeds player will be having to defend better and for longer with Frawley in the team. Picking Sinfield wouldn’t be a brave decision from Smith, it would just be the right decision. If we lose with Frawley in the team and he plays as bad as he usually does, then Smith deserves to get all the flak that comes his way. I’m not saying he gets a free pass for a loss if he picks Sinfield, but at least he’s shown some ambition which is what most fans want to see. The other unlikely scenario is that we beat Saints with Frawley in the team and Smith metaphorically gives the dissenting Leeds fans the big middle finger. We all know that is most unlikely.

Not sure what Sinfield has done to justify being a starter; if anything it is more a comment about discontent with Frawley.

Frawley is a more conservative pick for his defensive qualities. Sinfield probably has a better kicking game and likes to take on the line a bit more, but he's not exactly blessed with a pacey running game either. He's hardly the mercurial talent demanding to be picked in the way someone like Danny McGuire was. And he seems to lack the physical presence of his father, who was not big by RL standards. Let's not put too much pressure on him too soon. There are plenty of 'winnable' games coming up (as members of this forum like to predict in advance) that would be less pressured environments to bring in Sinfield. His long-term development comes before the desire of some fans to 'bin off' Frawley.

That said, Pete Smith expects Sinfield to start according to his predicted 17 for the game so maybe RS and GH tipped him off as the club's media mouthpiece

Frawley being a better defender I think is a fallacy.

I think it's so hard to say what people's opinion on Sinfield would be without his surname. Would he have the same hype? I honestly have no idea. He seems to be ahead of the reserves, but as others have pointed out isn't the next Danny Mags.

He could grow into a proper scrum half, but does seem a bit small and a bit slow... There's clearly too much expectation put on him which he's unfair. It seems like the club see him as a future club legend, but to me the jury is still out whether he'll make it as a regular decent SL player.

I think it's so hard to say what people's opinion on Sinfield would be without his surname. Would he have the same hype? I honestly have no idea. He seems to be ahead of the reserves, but as others have pointed out isn't the next Danny Mags.

He could grow into a proper scrum half, but does seem a bit small and a bit slow... There's clearly too much expectation put on him which he's unfair. It seems like the club see him as a future club legend, but to me the jury is still out whether he'll make it as a regular decent SL player.